Stop-It Randomized Clinical Trial (RCT) for Intra-Abdominal Infection (IAI) Revisited: Multivariate Analyses To Identify Treatment Effects 4 Days Antibiotic Agents Versus Resolution Signs/Symptoms + 2 Days and Drivers of Outcomes.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q4 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Nicholas P Zanghi, Nicole Stouffer, Gus J Slotman
{"title":"Stop-It Randomized Clinical Trial (RCT) for Intra-Abdominal Infection (IAI) Revisited: Multivariate Analyses To Identify Treatment Effects 4 Days Antibiotic Agents Versus Resolution Signs/Symptoms + 2 Days and Drivers of Outcomes.","authors":"Nicholas P Zanghi, Nicole Stouffer, Gus J Slotman","doi":"10.1089/sur.2024.277","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Background</i></b>: The STOP-IT randomized clinical trial (RCT) pioneered limiting antibiotic agents in intra-abdominal infection (IAI) with adequate surgical source control, but NIH funding ended before an adequate power sample size was enrolled to determine equivalence between STOP-IT study regimens: four days of antibiotic agents (4-days) after source control versus antibiotic agents until resolution of signs and symptoms of IAI plus two days (standard of care [SOC]). The objective of this investigation was to identify possible significant treatment effects 4-days versus SOC, and independent variables defining and predicting outcomes. <b><i>Methods</i></b>: De-identified data from 518 STOP-IT subjects were analyzed retrospectively in two groups: 4-days (n = 258) and SOC (n = 260), and separately as one group (n = 518). Statistics: multivariate regression analysis, chi-squared, and simple Cohen kappa coefficient. <b><i>Results</i></b>: No pre-randomization variable predicted protocol FAILURE (surgical site infection, recurrent IAI, or death at 30 d) in 4-day subjects. APACHE II predicted SOC FAILURE, but no cut point determined treatment effect (AUC = 0.608). Both observations implied that FAILURE may not reflect patient outcomes. Additionally, Cohen kappa for FAILURE and hospitalization at 7, 14, and 21 days was weak (0.1154, 0.2084, and 0.1969, respectively) with high numbers of discordant values. Pre-randomization variables associated with hospitalization/discharge at days 7, 14, and 21: extra-abdominal infection 1 (p < 0.0001), APACHE II score (p < 0.0001), age (p = 0.006), and WBC maximum (p < 0.05). However, all of these pre-randomization variables did not predict FAILURE, except APACHE II. <b><i>Conclusions</i></b>: Poor Cohen kappa coefficients indicate STOP-IT FAILURE agreed only weakly with hospital/discharge at 7, 14, or 21 days, and is not a valid reliable endpoint in IAI or for determining success or failure of any treatment. Pre-randomization extra-abdominal infection, APACHE II score, age, and WBC maximum strongly predicted hospitalization, but only APACHE II predicted failure. The study should use the appropriate sample size calculation when doing an equivalence on the basis of the Two One-Sided Test design. RCTs in IAI need prospectively validated clinically reliable endpoints that align with known patient outcomes that determine success.</p>","PeriodicalId":22109,"journal":{"name":"Surgical infections","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgical infections","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/sur.2024.277","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The STOP-IT randomized clinical trial (RCT) pioneered limiting antibiotic agents in intra-abdominal infection (IAI) with adequate surgical source control, but NIH funding ended before an adequate power sample size was enrolled to determine equivalence between STOP-IT study regimens: four days of antibiotic agents (4-days) after source control versus antibiotic agents until resolution of signs and symptoms of IAI plus two days (standard of care [SOC]). The objective of this investigation was to identify possible significant treatment effects 4-days versus SOC, and independent variables defining and predicting outcomes. Methods: De-identified data from 518 STOP-IT subjects were analyzed retrospectively in two groups: 4-days (n = 258) and SOC (n = 260), and separately as one group (n = 518). Statistics: multivariate regression analysis, chi-squared, and simple Cohen kappa coefficient. Results: No pre-randomization variable predicted protocol FAILURE (surgical site infection, recurrent IAI, or death at 30 d) in 4-day subjects. APACHE II predicted SOC FAILURE, but no cut point determined treatment effect (AUC = 0.608). Both observations implied that FAILURE may not reflect patient outcomes. Additionally, Cohen kappa for FAILURE and hospitalization at 7, 14, and 21 days was weak (0.1154, 0.2084, and 0.1969, respectively) with high numbers of discordant values. Pre-randomization variables associated with hospitalization/discharge at days 7, 14, and 21: extra-abdominal infection 1 (p < 0.0001), APACHE II score (p < 0.0001), age (p = 0.006), and WBC maximum (p < 0.05). However, all of these pre-randomization variables did not predict FAILURE, except APACHE II. Conclusions: Poor Cohen kappa coefficients indicate STOP-IT FAILURE agreed only weakly with hospital/discharge at 7, 14, or 21 days, and is not a valid reliable endpoint in IAI or for determining success or failure of any treatment. Pre-randomization extra-abdominal infection, APACHE II score, age, and WBC maximum strongly predicted hospitalization, but only APACHE II predicted failure. The study should use the appropriate sample size calculation when doing an equivalence on the basis of the Two One-Sided Test design. RCTs in IAI need prospectively validated clinically reliable endpoints that align with known patient outcomes that determine success.

停止- it随机临床试验(RCT)腹内感染(IAI)再访:多变量分析以确定4天抗生素治疗效果与缓解症状/体征+ 2天和结果驱动因素。
背景:STOP-IT随机临床试验(RCT)率先在充分的手术源控制下限制腹部感染(IAI)的抗生素使用,但NIH的资助在足够的功率样本量被纳入以确定STOP-IT研究方案之间的等效性之前结束:源控制后4天抗生素使用与抗生素使用,直到IAI的体征和症状消退再加2天(标准护理[SOC])。本研究的目的是确定4天与SOC相比可能的显著治疗效果,以及定义和预测结果的独立变量。方法:回顾性分析518例STOP-IT患者的去识别资料,分为4天组(n = 258)和SOC组(n = 260),并单独作为一组(n = 518)。统计学:多元回归分析,卡方,简单科恩卡帕系数。结果:在4天的受试者中,没有预随机化变量预测方案失败(手术部位感染、复发性IAI或30 d死亡)。APACHE II预测SOC FAILURE,但没有切点决定治疗效果(AUC = 0.608)。这两项观察都暗示失败可能不能反映患者的结果。此外,FAILURE和住院第7、14和21天的Cohen kappa较弱(分别为0.1154、0.2084和0.1969),不协调值较多。与第7、14和21天住院/出院相关的预随机化变量:腹外感染1 (p < 0.0001)、APACHE II评分(p < 0.0001)、年龄(p = 0.006)和WBC最大值(p < 0.05)。然而,除了APACHE II外,所有这些预随机化变量都不能预测FAILURE。结论:较差的Cohen kappa系数表明,STOP-IT FAILURE仅与住院/出院时间为7、14或21天的患者吻合较弱,并不是IAI中有效可靠的终点,也不是确定任何治疗成功或失败的终点。预随机化腹外感染、APACHE II评分、年龄和WBC最大值强烈预测住院,但只有APACHE II预测失败。在双单侧检验设计的基础上进行等效时,研究应使用适当的样本量计算。IAI的随机对照试验需要经过前瞻性验证的临床可靠终点,这些终点与决定成功的已知患者结局一致。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Surgical infections
Surgical infections INFECTIOUS DISEASES-SURGERY
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
5.00%
发文量
127
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Surgical Infections provides comprehensive and authoritative information on the biology, prevention, and management of post-operative infections. Original articles cover the latest advancements, new therapeutic management strategies, and translational research that is being applied to improve clinical outcomes and successfully treat post-operative infections. Surgical Infections coverage includes: -Peritonitis and intra-abdominal infections- Surgical site infections- Pneumonia and other nosocomial infections- Cellular and humoral immunity- Biology of the host response- Organ dysfunction syndromes- Antibiotic use- Resistant and opportunistic pathogens- Epidemiology and prevention- The operating room environment- Diagnostic studies
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信